The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and BabyloniaPinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Religion
The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia
Pinches, Theophilus G. (Theophilus Goldridge)
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
Here, too, dwelt “Tammuz of the Abyss,” one of Ae’s sons, but whether this
was the well-known Tammuz who was the husband of the goddess Ishtar, is
uncertain. Judging from the legends of the Babylonians, Ishtar’s husband
descended, not to the abode of the lord of the deep, but to the realms of
the Babylonian Persephone, the consort of Nergal, in Hades, “the land of
no return,” whither Ishtar once descended in search of him. Concerning the
Babylonian paradise, where Ae dwelt, see the following chapter.
The second month of the Babylonian year, Iyyar, corresponding to
April—May, was dedicated to Ae as lord of mankind, though in this the
records contradict each other, for the Creation-stories of the Babylonians
attribute the creation of mankind to Merodach, who has, therefore, the
best right to be regarded as their lord.
Anšar And Kišar (pp. 16, 17, 20, etc.).
Anšar, “host of heaven,” and Kišar, “host of earth,” are, it will be
remembered, given in the Semitic Babylonian account of the Creation as the
names of the powers that succeeded Laḫmu and Laḫamu, according to
Damascius, the second progeny of the sea and the deep (Tiamtu and Apsū).
The Greek forms, Assoros and Kisaré, imply that Damascius understood the
former to be masculine and the latter feminine, though there is no hint of
gender in the wedge-written records. That the Babylonians regarded them as
being of different genders, however, is conceivable enough. The Greek form
of the first, Assoros, moreover, implies that, in course of time, the _n_
of Anšar became assimilated with the _š_ (as was usual in Semitic
Babylonian), and on account of this, the etymology that connects Anšar
with the name of the Assyrian national god Aššur, is not without
justification, though whether it be preferable to that of Delitzsch which
makes Aššur to be really Ašur, and connects it with _ašaru_, meaning
“holy,” is doubtful. In favour of Delitzsch, however, is the fact that the
Assyrians would more probably have given their chief divinity the name of
“the Holy one” than that of one of the links in the chain of divinities
which culminated in the rise of the god Merodach to the highest place in
the kingdom of heaven.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account